Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Measurement invariance of the Satisfaction with Life Scale: reviewing three decades of research

  • Review
  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) is a widely used measure of life satisfaction, a key aspect in quality of life. The SWLS has been used across many socio-demographic groups. Comparison of life satisfaction across different subgroups (e.g., cultures) is meaningful to researchers; such cross-group comparison presupposes that validity of the inferences from SWLS scores holds across various subgroups (measurement invariance: MI). The aim of the present review was to identify, summarize, and evaluate research testing measurement invariance of the SWLS.

Methods

A targeted literature search identified articles (published 1985–2016) that examined MI of the SWLS using multi-group confirmatory factor analysis.

Results

The search retrieved 27 articles, representing 66,380 respondents across 24 nations. Gender, age, and culture were the most common types of MI assessed. Most articles used translated (non-English) versions of the SWLS. The highest level of MI tested in each article (i.e., configural, metric, scalar, strict) varied. Findings generally supported a unidimensional structure (configural MI), but less commonly supported were equivalent factor loadings (metric MI). Over half of the gender invariance analyses supported scalar or strict MI, whereas scalar or strict MI was supported in only 1 of the 11 culture MI analyses and 1 of the 9 age MI analyses.

Conclusions

Findings suggest meaningful comparisons of SWLS means across gender may be valid in some situations, but most likely not across culture or age groups. Participants mostly ascribe similar meaning to like items on the SWLS regardless of their gender, but age and especially culture seem to influence this process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Blais et al. [[40] seem to have been the first to test MI of the SWLS using MG-CFA, observing configural invariance across university students and older adults in Canada. We did not include it, however, because the article failed our inclusion criteria (i.e., it was not published in English).

  2. Atienza et al. [52] imposed cross-group constraints on factor structure, loadings, and residual variances but did not test invariance of intercepts. As MI through MG-CFA is hierarchical, we classified this as examining up to metric.

  3. Ponizovsky et al. [60] claimed scalar MI was observed, despite indices indicating configural MI was unsupported, as changes in Δ CFI exceeded the 0.01 threshold (configural: 0.963, metric: 0.993, scalar: 0.954), and RMSEA values were inadequate (>0.10) [31, 67].

  4. Pons et al. [64] suggested that strict invariance was tested but testing equality of intercepts was neglected, so it was coded as having tested up to the metric level.

References

  1. O’Donnell, G. (2013). Using well-being as a guide to policy. World Happiness Report, 2013, 98–111.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Black, N. (2013). Patient reported outcome measures could help transform healthcare. BMJ, 346, f167.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Fiske, S. T., Oishi, S., & Diener, E. (2014). Can and should happiness be a policy goal? Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1(1), 195–203.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (2008). The satisfaction with life scale and the emerging construct of life satisfaction. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 3(2), 137–152.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cummins, R. A. (2013). Measuring happiness and subjective well-being. In S. A. David, I. Boniwell, A. Conley Ayers (Eds.) Oxford handbook of happiness, (pp. 185–200). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Kaczmarek, L. D., Bujacz, A., & Eid, M. (2015). Comparative latent state–trait analysis of satisfaction with life measures: The Steen Happiness Index and the Satisfaction with Life Scale. Journal of Happiness Studies, 16(2), 443–453.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bollen, K., & Lennox, R. (1991). Conventional wisdom on measurement: A structural equation perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 110(2), 305.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Schimmack, U., Diener, E., & Oishi, S. (2002). Life-satisfaction is a momentary judgment and a stable personality characteristic: The use of chronically accessible and stable sources. Journal of Personality, 70(3), 345–384.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Eid, M., & Diener, E. (2004). Global judgments of subjective well-being: Situational variability and long-term stability. Social Indicators Research, 65(3), 245–277.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Miller, M. J., & Sheu, H. (2008). Conceptual and measurement issues in multicultural psychology research. Handbook of Counseling Psychology, 4, 103–120.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(1), 4–70.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kern, J. L., McBride, B. A., Laxman, D. J., Dyer, W. J., Santos, R. M., & Jeans, L. M. (2016). The role of multiple-group measurement invariance in family psychology research. Journal of Family Psychology, 30(3), 364.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lubke, G. H., Dolan, C. V., Kelderman, H., & Mellenbergh, G. J. (2003). Weak measurement invariance with respect to unmeasured variables: An implication of strict factorial invariance. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 56(2), 231–248.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Gregorich, S. E. (2006). Do self-report instruments allow meaningful comparisons across diverse population groups? Testing measurement invariance using the confirmatory factor analysis framework. Medical Care, 44(11 Suppl 3), S78.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Chicago: Scientific Software International.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Meredith, W. (1993). Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika, 58(4), 525–543.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Milfont, T. L., & Fischer, R. (2015). Testing measurement invariance across groups: Applications in cross-cultural research. International Journal of Psychological Research, 3(1), 111–130.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Gustavsson, J. P., Eriksson, A. K., Hilding, A., Gunnarsson, M., & Östensson, C. G. (2008). Measurement invariance of personality traits from a five-factor model perspective: multi-group confirmatory factor analyses of the HP5 inventory. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 49(5), 459–467.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Sass, D. (2011). Testing measurement invariance and comparing latent factor means within a confirmatory factor analysis framework. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29(4), 347–363.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Steenkamp, J.-B. E., & Baumgartner, H. (1998). Assessing measurement invariance in cross-national consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(1), 78–90.

    Google Scholar 

  23. McArdle, J. (1998). Contemporary statistical models for examining test bias. In J. J. McArdle & R. W. Woodcock (Eds.), Human abilities in theory and practice. (pp. 157–195). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Millsap, R. E., & Meredith, W. (2007). Factorial invariance: Historical perspectives and new problems. In Em R. Cudeck & R. C. MacCallum (Eds.) Factor analysis at 100: Historical developments and future directions, (pp. 131–152). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Wu, A. D., Li, Z., & Zumbo, B. D. (2007). Decoding the meaning of factorial invariance and updating the practice of multi-group confirmatory factor analysis: A demonstration with TIMSS data. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 12(3), 1–26.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. DeShon, R. P. (2004). Measures are not invariant across groups without error variance homogeneity. Psychology Science, 46, 137–149.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Steiger, J. H., & Lind, J. C. (1980). Statistically based tests for the number of common factors. In annual meeting of the Psychometric Society, Iowa City, IA, (Vol. 758, pp. 424–453).

  28. MacCallum, R. C., Roznowski, M., & Necowitz, L. B. (1992). Model modifications in covariance structure analysis: the problem of capitalization on chance. Psychological Bulletin, 111(3), 490.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Journal of Business Research, 6(1), 53–60.

  31. Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14(3), 464–504.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). Most people are not WEIRD. Nature, 466(7302), 29–29.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Oishi, S., Diener, E. F., Lucas, R. E., & Suh, E. M. (1999). Cross-cultural variations in predictors of life satisfaction: Perspectives from needs and values. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25(8), 980–990.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Boroditsky, L., Fuhrman, O., & McCormick, K. (2011). Do English and Mandarin speakers think about time differently? Cognition, 118(1), 123–129.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Oishi, S., Diener, E., Suh, E., & Lucas, R. E. (1999). Value as a moderator in subjective well-being. Journal of Personality, 67(1), 157–184.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Byrne, B. M., Shavelson, R. J., & Muthén, B. (1989). Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: The issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 105(3), 456.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Chinni, M. L., & Hubley, A. M. (2014). A research synthesis of validation practices used to evaluate the satisfaction with life scale (SWLS). In Validity and validation in social, behavioral, and health sciences (pp. 35–66). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Vautier, S., Mullet, E., & Jmel, S. (2004). Assessing the structural robustness of self-rated satisfaction with life: A sem analysis. Social Indicators Research, 68(2), 235–249. doi:10.1023/B:SOCI.0000025595.92546.eb.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Shevlin, M., Brunsden, V., & Miles, J. (1998). Satisfaction with life scale: Analysis of factorial invariance, mean structures and reliability. Personality and Individual Differences, 25(5), 911–916.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Blais, M. R., Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., & Brière, N. M. (1989). L’échelle de satisfaction de vie: Validation canadienne-française du “Satisfaction with Life Scale”. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 21(2), 210.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Bai, X., Wu, C., Zheng, R., & Ren, X. (2011). The psychometric evaluation of the Satisfaction with Life Scale using a nationally representative sample of China. Journal of Happiness Studies, 12(2), 183–197.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Clench-Aas, J., Nes, R. B., Dalgard, O. S., & Aarø, L. E. (2011). Dimensionality and measurement invariance in the Satisfaction with Life Scale in Norway. Quality of Life Research, 20(8), 1307–1317.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Moksnes, U. K., Løhre, A., Byrne, D. G., & Haugan, G. (2014). Satisfaction with life scale in adolescents: Evaluation of factor structure and gender invariance in a Norwegian sample. Social Indicators Research, 118(2), 657–671.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Tomás, J. M., Gutiérrez, M., Sancho, P., & Romero, I. (2015). Measurement invariance of the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS) by gender and age in Angola. Personality and Individual Differences, 85, 182–186. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2015.05.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Hultell, D., & Gustavsson, J. P. (2008). A psychometric evaluation of the Satisfaction with Life Scale in a Swedish nationwide sample of university students. Personality and Individual Differences, 44(5), 1070–1079.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Jovanovic, V. (2016). The validity of the Satisfaction with Life Scale in adolescents and a comparison with single-item life satisfaction measures: a preliminary study. Quality of life Research, 25(12), 3173–3180. doi:10.1007/s11136-016-1331-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Zanon, C., Bardagi, M. P., Layous, K., & Hutz, C. S. (2014). Validation of the satisfaction with life scale to Brazilians: Evidences of measurement noninvariance across Brazil and US. Social Indicators Research, 119(1), 443–453.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Glaesmer, H., Grande, G., Braehler, E., & Roth, M. (2011). The German version of the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS). European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 27(2), 127–132. doi:10.1027/1015-5759/a000058.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Sovet, L., Atitsogbe, K. A., Pari, P., Park, M. S. A., & Villieux, A. (2016). Psychometric evaluation of the satisfaction with life scale in Togo: A three-step approach. European Review of Applied Psychology, 66(5), 243–250, doi:10.1016/j.erap.2016.06.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Swami, V., & Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2009). Psychometric evaluation of the Malay satisfaction with life scale. Social Indicators Research, 92(1), 25.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Wu, C.-h., & Yao, G. (2006). Analysis of factorial invariance across gender in the Taiwan version of the Satisfaction with Life Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 40(6), 1259–1268. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2005.11.012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Atienza, F. L., Balaguer, I., & García-Merita, M. a. L (2003). Satisfaction with life scale: Analysis of factorial invariance across sexes. Personality and Individual Differences, 35(6), 1255–1260.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Jovanović, V., Joshanloo, M., Đunda, D., & Bakhshi, A. (2016). Gender differences in the relationship between domain-specific and general life satisfaction: A study in Iran and Serbia. Applied Research in Quality of Life. doi:10.1007/s11482-016-9461-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Tucker, K. L., Ozer, D. J., Lyubomirsky, S., & Boehm, J. K. (2006). Testing for measurement invariance in the satisfaction with life scale: A comparison of Russians and North Americans. Social Indicators Research, 78(2), 341–360.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Atienza Gonzalez, F. L., Balaguer Sola, I., Corte-Real, N., & Fonseca, A. M. (2016). Factorial invariance of the Satisfaction with Life Scale in adolescents from Spain and Portugal. Psicothema, 28(3), 353–358. doi:10.7334/psicothema2016.1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Dimitrova, R., & Espinosa, A. D. C. D. (2015). Measurement Invariance of the Satisfaction with Life Scale in Argentina, Mexico and Nicaragua. Social Inquiry into Well-Being, 1(1), 32. doi:10.13165/siiw-15-1-1-04.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Whisman, M. A., & Judd, C. M. (2016). A cross-national analysis of measurement invariance of the Satisfaction With Life Scale. Psychological assessment, 28(2), 239–244. doi:10.1037/pas0000181.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Bieda, A., Hirschfeld, G., Schonfeld, P., Brailovskaia, J., Zhang, X. C., & Margraf, J. (2016). Universal happiness? Cross-cultural measurement invariance of scales assessing positive mental health. Psychological assessment. doi:10.1037/pas0000353.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Oishi, S. (2006). The concept of life satisfaction across cultures: An IRT analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 40(4), 411–423.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Ponizovsky, Y., Dimitrova, R., Schachner, M. K., & van de Schoot, R. (2013). The Satisfaction With Life Scale: Measurement invariance across immigrant groups. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 10(4), 526–532. doi:10.1080/17405629.2012.707778.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Durak, M., Senol-Durak, E., & Gencoz, T. (2010). Psychometric properties of the Satisfaction with Life Scale among Turkish university students, correctional officers, and elderly adults. Social Indicators Research, 99(3), 413–429.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Siedlecki, K. L., Tucker-Drob, E. M., Oishi, S., & Salthouse, T. A. (2008). Life satisfaction across adulthood: different determinants at different ages? The Journal of Positive Psychology, 3(3), 153–164. doi:10.1080/17439760701834602.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Gouveia, V. V., Milfont, T. L., Da Fonseca, P. N., & de Miranda Coelho, J. A. P. (2009). Life satisfaction in Brazil: Testing the psychometric properties of the satisfaction with life scale (SWLS) in five Brazilian samples. Social Indicators Research, 90(2), 267.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Pons, D., Atienza, F. L., Balaguer, I., & García-Merita, M. L. (2000). Satisfaction With Life Scale: Analysis of factorial invariance for adolescents and elderly persons. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 91(1), 62–68.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Wu, C.-H., Chen, L. H., & Tsai, Y.-M. (2009). Longitudinal invariance analysis of the satisfaction with life scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 46(4), 396–401. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2008.11.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Gana, K., Bailly, N., Saada, Y., Joulain, M., & Alaphilippe, D. (2013). Does life satisfaction change in old age: results from an 8-year longitudinal study. The Journals of Gerontology B, 68(4), 540–552. doi:10.1093/geronb/gbs093.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3(4), 424.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Jöreskog, K., & Sörbom, D. (2006). LISREL 8.8 statistical program [Scientific Software]. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Kushner, E. (2003). English as global language: problems, dangers, opportunities. Diogenes, 50(2), 17–23.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Van Nes, F., Abma, T., Jonsson, H., & Deeg, D. (2010). Language differences in qualitative research: is meaning lost in translation? European Journal of Ageing, 7(4), 313–316.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  71. Huebner, E. S. (1991). Initial development of the student’s life satisfaction scale. School Psychology International, 12(3), 231–240.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Gadermann, A. M., Schonert-Reichl, K. A., & Zumbo, B. D. (2010). Investigating validity evidence of the satisfaction with life scale adapted for children. Social Indicators Research, 96(2), 229–247.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Van De Schoot, R., Schmidt, P., De Beuckelaer, A., Lek, K., & Zondervan-Zwijnenburg, M. (2015). Editorial: Measurement invariance. Frontier in Psychology, 6, 1064.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50(9), 741.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Zumbo, B. D. (2009). Validity as contextualized and pragmatic explanation, and its implications for validation practice. In R. W. Lissitz (Ed.) The concept of validity: Revisions, new directions and applications (pp. 65–82). Charlotte: IAP – Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by a Tri-Council Canada Graduate Scholarship awarded to the first author. The last author received research funding from the Lawson Foundation, Canada.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Human Early Learning Partnership, School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, 2206 East Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z3, Canada

    Scott D. Emerson, Martin Guhn & Anne M. Gadermann

Authors
  1. Scott D. Emerson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Martin Guhn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anne M. Gadermann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Scott D. Emerson.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

No human participants were involved in the article as it is a review of previously published research.

Appendix: Articles included in review (n = 27), ordered by year of publication

Appendix: Articles included in review (n = 27), ordered by year of publication

Shevlin, M., Brunsden, V., & Miles, J. (1998). Satisfaction with life scale: Analysis of factorial invariance, mean structures and reliability. Personality and Individual Differences, 25(5), 911–916.

Pons, D., Atienza, F. L., Balaguer, I., & García-Merita, M. L. (2000). Satisfaction With Life Scale: Analysis of factorial invariance for adolescents and elderly persons. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 91(1), 62–68.

Atienza, F. L., Balaguer, I., & Garcı́a-Merita, M. a. L. (2003). Satisfaction with life scale: Analysis of factorial invariance across sexes. Personality and Individual Differences, 35(6), 1255–1260.

Tucker, K. L., Ozer, D. J., Lyubomirsky, S., & Boehm, J. K. (2006). Testing for measurement invariance in the satisfaction with life scale: A comparison of Russians and North Americans. Social Indicators Research, 78(2), 341–360.

Wu, C.-H., & Yao, G. (2006). Analysis of factorial invariance across gender in the Taiwan version of the Satisfaction with Life Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 40(6), 1259–1268.

Oishi, S. (2006). The concept of life satisfaction across cultures: An IRT analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 40(4), 411–423.

Hultell, D., & Gustavsson, J. P. (2008). A psychometric evaluation of the Satisfaction with Life Scale in a Swedish nationwide sample of university students. Personality and Individual Differences, 44(5), 1070–1079.

Siedlecki, K. L., Tucker-Drob, E. M., Oishi, S., & Salthouse, T. A. (2008). Life satisfaction across adulthood: different determinants at different ages? J Posit Psychol, 3(3), 153–164.

Gouveia, V. V., Milfont, T. L., Da Fonseca, P. N., & de Miranda Coelho, J. A. P. (2009). Life satisfaction in Brazil: Testing the psychometric properties of the satisfaction with life scale (SWLS) in five Brazilian samples. Social Indicators Research, 90(2), 267.

Swami, V., & Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2009). Psychometric evaluation of the Malay satisfaction with life scale. Social Indicators Research, 92(1), 25.

Wu, C.-H., Chen, L. H., & Tsai, Y.-M. (2009). Longitudinal invariance analysis of the satisfaction with life scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 46(4), 396–401.

Durak, M., Senol-Durak, E., & Gencoz, T. (2010). Psychometric properties of the Satisfaction with Life Scale among Turkish university students, correctional officers, and elderly adults. Social Indicators Research, 99(3), 413–429.

Bai, X., Wu, C., Zheng, R., & Ren, X. (2011). The psychometric evaluation of the Satisfaction with Life Scale using a nationally representative sample of China. Journal of Happiness Studies, 12(2), 183–197.

Clench-Aas, J., Nes, R. B., Dalgard, O. S., & Aarø, L. E. (2011). Dimensionality and measurement invariance in the Satisfaction with Life Scale in Norway. Quality of Life Research, 20(8), 1307–1317.

Glaesmer, H., Grande, G., Braehler, E., & Roth, M. (2011). The German Version of the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS). European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 27(2), 127–132.

Ponizovsky, Y., Dimitrova, R., Schachner, M. K., & van de Schoot, R. (2013). The Satisfaction With Life Scale: Measurement invariance across immigrant groups. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 10(4), 526–532.

Gana, K., Bailly, N., Saada, Y., Joulain, M., & Alaphilippe, D. (2013). Does life satisfaction change in old age: results from an 8-year longitudinal study. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci, 68(4), 540–552.

Moksnes, U. K., Løhre, A., Byrne, D. G., & Haugan, G. (2014). Satisfaction with life scale in adolescents: Evaluation of factor structure and gender invariance in a Norwegian sample. Social Indicators Research, 118(2), 657–671.

Zanon, C., Bardagi, M. P., Layous, K., & Hutz, C. S. (2014). Validation of the satisfaction with life scale to Brazilians: Evidences of measurement noninvariance across Brazil and US. Social Indicators Research, 119(1), 443–453.

Tomás, J. M., Gutiérrez, M., Sancho, P., & Romero, I. (2015). Measurement invariance of the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS) by gender and age in Angola. Personality and Individual Differences, 85, 182–186.

Dimitrova, R., & Dominguez Espinosa, A. d. C. (2015). Measurement Invariance of the Satisfaction with Life Scale in Argentina, Mexico and Nicaragua. Social Inquiry into Well-Being, 1(1), 32.

Whisman, M. A., & Judd, C. M. (2016). A cross-national analysis of measurement invariance of the Satisfaction With Life Scale. Psychol Assess, 28(2), 239–244.

Jovanovic, V. (2016a). The validity of the Satisfaction with Life Scale in adolescents and a comparison with single-item life satisfaction measures: a preliminary study. Qual Life Res, 25(12), 3173–3180.

Jovanović, V., Joshanloo, M., Đunda, D., & Bakhshi, A. (2016b). Gender Differences in the Relationship Between Domain-Specific and General Life Satisfaction: A Study in Iran and Serbia. Applied Research in Quality of Life.

Sovet, L., Atitsogbe, K. A., Pari, P., Park, M. S. A., & Villieux, A. (2016). Psychometric evaluation of the satisfaction with life scale in Togo: A three-step approach. Revue Européenne de Psychologie Appliquée/European Review of Applied Psychology, 66(5), 243–250.

Atienza Gonzalez, F. L., Balaguer Sola, I., Corte-Real, N., & Fonseca, A. M. (2016). Factorial invariance of the Satisfaction with Life Scale in adolescents from Spain and Portugal. Psicothema, 28(3), 353–358.

Bieda, A., Hirschfeld, G., Schonfeld, P., Brailovskaia, J., Zhang, X. C., & Margraf, J. (2016). Universal Happiness? Cross-Cultural Measurement Invariance of Scales Assessing Positive Mental Health. Psychol Assess.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Emerson, S.D., Guhn, M. & Gadermann, A.M. Measurement invariance of the Satisfaction with Life Scale: reviewing three decades of research. Qual Life Res 26, 2251–2264 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1552-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1552-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation